[OPSAWG] Soliciting comments on draft-liu-running-multiple-prefixes-01
"Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com> Thu, 24 October 2013 02:44 UTC
Return-Path: <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD4A11E829C for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 45EuQSxTtcBG for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:44:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A3A11E822F for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2013 19:44:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AZK19585; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 02:44:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:44:07 +0100
Received: from NKGEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.39) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 03:44:10 +0100
Received: from NKGEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.141]) by nkgeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0146.000; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 10:44:05 +0800
From: "Liubing (Leo)" <leo.liubing@huawei.com>
To: "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Soliciting comments on draft-liu-running-multiple-prefixes-01
Thread-Index: Ac7QYuTPryzwQLYDQKO/FE6oY6aVaw==
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 02:44:04 +0000
Message-ID: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D7CD04D@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-cr-hashedpuzzle: Ac+w Be46 CEcj Cw5T DWc7 DzhY E22N F9kQ GUCS Gccx HqxQ Iaqb JqRo KCT1 K93r MI0a; 1; bwBwAHMAYQB3AGcAQABpAGUAdABmAC4AbwByAGcA; Sosha1_v1; 7; {F6678AF2-6E17-4675-B66B-ADBA89BAE357}; bABlAG8ALgBsAGkAdQBiAGkAbgBnAEAAaAB1AGEAdwBlAGkALgBjAG8AbQA=; Thu, 24 Oct 2013 02:44:01 GMT; UwBvAGwAaQBjAGkAdABpAG4AZwAgAGMAbwBtAG0AZQBuAHQAcwAgAG8AbgAgAGQAcgBhAGYAdAAtAGwAaQB1AC0AcgB1AG4AbgBpAG4AZwAtAG0AdQBsAHQAaQBwAGwAZQAtAHAAcgBlAGYAaQB4AGUAcwAtADAAMQA=
x-cr-puzzleid: {F6678AF2-6E17-4675-B66B-ADBA89BAE357}
x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.132]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: [OPSAWG] Soliciting comments on draft-liu-running-multiple-prefixes-01
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 02:44:27 -0000
Hi All, We have submitted a draft: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-running-multiple-prefixes-01 May I request your review and comments. Any feedback would be appreciated much. A brief intro of this draft: Administrators might not be familiar with running multiple prefixes simultaneously in networks, since it is not a normal deployment model in IPv4. But in IPv6, the hosts are naturally ready for multiple addresses, and in some cases multiple prefixes could benefit the network use (as the use cases described in the draft, multihoming/semantic prefixes/addresses with multiple scopes/separated OAM plane .etc ), so it might become a very common deployment model in real IPv6 networks. This draft aims at helping readers to understand and be accustomed to run multiple prefixes in IPv6 networks. Use cases, operational considerations, and current gaps are provided in the draft. Many thanks and best regards, Bing
- [OPSAWG] Soliciting comments on draft-liu-running… Liubing (Leo)